Tuesday 28 June 2016

Ustaz Wan Ji Wan Hassan make Polis report against Mufti of Pahang for kafir harbi remark

Thank God it finally happened, someone brave enough to lodge a Polis report against the Mufti of Pahang:

Muslim preacher lodges police report against Pahang mufti over ‘kafir harbi’ remark

KUALA LUMPUR, June 27 — Independent Muslim preacher Wan Ji Wan Hussin lodged a police report today against the Pahang mufti over the latter’s remark claiming that anyone who opposed Islam, specifically DAP, was a “kafir harbi” or “non-Muslim infidel”.

Representing PKR Youth’s Badan Pemantapan dan Pemahaman Agama (BPPA), he said that Datuk Seri Dr Abdul Rahman Osman statement was dangerous as it was similar to the propaganda spread by terrorist group Islamic State (IS) or ISIS.

“ISIS follows the teachings that anyone who has a religious stance different from theirs will be accused of being anti-Islam or ‘harbi.’

“We can see that ISIS is a danger to the country because they use religious teachings to justify their actions. When the mufti uses the same terms for non-Muslims, it’s dangerous,” he said in a phone interview with Malay Mail Online after lodging a police report at the Dang Wangi contingent police headquarters today.

He added that in a multiracial and multireligious country like Malaysia, such statements can be very divisive and hoped that the police will act on it.

“This shouldn't be happening in Malaysia. I hope police will take this seriously and we want them to take action. We don't want this to end in violence,” he added.

On Friday, Abdul Rahman was quoted in Utusan Malaysia as labelling the DAP “kafir harbi” over its opposition to hudud laws, adding as well that it would be a “great sin” for Muslims to support the party.

It is believed that those categorised as “kafir harbi” can be killed for being against the implementation of Islamic principles and going against God.

He later clarified in a Sinar Harian report that he wasn’t referring to anyone within the opposition party but rather to DAP’s overall ideology, adding that the term applies to any who opposed Islam.

Abdul Rahman has come under criticism from Muslims and non-Muslims alike for the remark that critics contend would incite violence and extremism, given the growing influence and presence of militant groups like the Islamic State (IS) in Malaysia.

Even Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali, a frequent and vocal detractor of the DAP, said the Pahang Mufti was excessive to label the opposition party “kafir harbi” simply due to political or other differences.

Though Islam is its official religion, Malaysia is a multi-religious and multiracial country and statements such as that given by the Mufti be it in his personal or official capacity cannot be condoned.

Many of us are waiting to hear from the IGP, the PM and the DPM on the matter...silence is not an option. Action must be taken....

Malaysia is no place for religion inspired extremist like ISIS...the Government must act accordingly and decisively to secure our continued peace. 

Sunday 26 June 2016

Selamat Tinggal Umno

KENYATAAN MEDIA UMNO BAHAGIAN PAGOH

UMNO Bahagian Pagoh yang bermesyuarat pada hari ini 25 Jun 2016 yang dipengerusikan oleh YB. Timbalan Ketua UMNO Bahagian Pagoh memutuskan
MENOLAK keputusan MT memecat YB. Tan Sri Muhyiddin berdasarkan perkara berikut :-

1.  Tidak mengikut prosedur yang sepatutnya mengikut saluran yang berperingkat  seperti yang termaktub dalam perlembagaan Parti (Fasal 20 Disiplin). MKT dan Perlembagaan UMNO disalahguna oleh Presiden dan mengenepikan amalan demokrasi dalam UMNO. YB Tan Sri Muhyiddin tidak dipanggil untuk mempertahankan tuduhan terhadapnya sejak awal penggantungannya.

2. Tan Sri Muhyiddin telah dipilih Timbalan Presiden UMNO dan  Ketua UMNO Bahagian Pagoh  oleh ahli Parti seluruh Negara makanya tindakan MT telah mengkhianati ahli UMNO. YB. Tan Sri Muhyiddin tidak diberi peluang dan dinafikan hak untuk berucap dan menjalankan tugas-tugas Timbalan Presiden Parti. Oleh yang demikian, beliau terpaksa menggunakan pentas NGO untuk pejuangan ini. 

3. YB. Tan Sri menyatakan masalah salah laku / jenayah yang dilakukan oleh Presiden berdasarkan daripada laporan yang berintegriti daripada Agensi Kerajaan seperti bekas Peguam Negara, Bekas Gabenor Bank Negara dan SPRM. Isu ini masih terus didedahkan di peringkat Antarabangsa dan tiada penghujungnya. Laporan PAC selari dengan apa yang disuarakan oleh YB Tan Sri Muhyiddin seperti membubarkan Lembaga Penasihat 1MDB dan sebagainya.

4. YB. Tan Sri menegur Presiden adalah untuk memperkukuhkan Parti bukan untuk kepentingan peribadi.Beliau mengambil tanggungjawab mempertahankan Parti dan imej negara . Beliau tidak pernah memburukkan parti dan bertindak untuk memastikan parti diperkasakan.

5. Sebahagian besar UMNO Cawangan dalam Pagoh ( 103 cawangan daripada 106 Cawangan ) telah melahirkan rasa kekecewaan terhadap Presiden Parti yang bertindak merosakan parti terutamanya isu 2.6b dan 1MDB. Sebahagian besar menyokong Tan Sri Muhyiddin dan memutuskan Presiden Parti berundur .

6. Tindakan MT memecat YB Tan Sri Muhyiddin telah menimbulkan rasa kecewa dan tidak puashati kepada Ahli UMNO Bahagian Pagoh dan merosakkan perpaduan serta keutuhan yang selama ini menjadi kekuatan UMNO Bahagian Pagoh. Pemecatan ini berlaku di bulan Ramadan dan kita merasai sepatutnya pemimpin mewujudkan perpaduan dikalangan ahli parti.

7. UMNO Bahagian Pagoh merasakan bangga dengan perjuangan YB. Tan Sri Muhyiddin dalam menegakkan kebenaran dan terus istiqamah dalam perjuangannya. 

UMNO Pagoh akan terus berdiri teguh bersama YB. Tan Sri Muhyiddin Bin Hj. Mohd. Yassin dalam perjuangannya dalam menegakkan kebenaran.
Biar apapun berlaku, UMNO Pagoh akan terus padu kerana kami sayang UMNO Johor yang lahir di Johor, malahan di Istana Johor dan suatu ketika dulu telah menyatupadukan orang Melayu Johor.

Berani Kerana Benar

KENYATAAN YB TAN SRI DATO' HJ MUHYIDDIN HJ MOHD YASSIN

Setelah lebih empat dekad saya melalui perit jerih dan suka duka perjuangan di dalam UMNO, semalam Majlis Tertinggi membuat keputusan untuk memecat saya daripada parti. Saya tidak pernah meninggalkan perjuangan parti atau mengkhianati parti. Saya cuma berkata benar kerana itulah prinsip yang saya junjung dalam perjuangan saya. 

Malangnya saya dipecat kerana apa yang saya perkatakan selama ini menyentuh skandal moral dan kewangan paling besar dalam sejarah UMNO dan negara yang melibatkan Perdana Menteri. Sahabat saya Datuk Seri Mukhriz Mahathir juga dipecat dan Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal digantung keahlian. Segala-galanya berlaku hanya kerani kami mengambil langkah berani menegur Perdana Menteri yang sudah jauh tersasar daripada perjuangan UMNO yang asal.

Saya berasa kecewa kerana UMNO yang ada pada hari ini bukan lagi UMNO yang sebenar. Ia telah berubah menjadi sebuah parti yang dikuasai hanya oleh seorang individu yang sanggup melakukan apa sahaja untuk menutup kesalahannya dan menyelamatkan dirinya. Mereka yang melakukan perbuatan jenayah yang merosakkan imej parti dan integriti tidak menerima hukuman yang setimpal. Sebaliknya, mereka yang berjuang untuk menegakkan kebenaran dan keadilan dipecat daripada parti.

Mereka yang menguasai UMNO boleh melakukan apa sahaja terhadap saya, namun saya tidak rela hidup melutut. Bukan prinsip saya untuk tunduk bersekongkol dengan perbuatan jahat seorang pemimpin yang merosakkan bangsa dan negara. 

Keputusan pemecatan saya ini telah pun saya duga dari awal. Maka semalam berakhirlah sejarah panjang perjalanan hidup saya yang penuh liku di dalam UMNO. Sejarah ini akan terus terpahat dalam ingatan saya kerana UMNO telah sekian lama menjadi sebahagian daripada denyut nadi dan darah daging saya. Hakikat ini tidak boleh dinafikan oleh sesiapapun hatta diri saya sendiri. Saya tidak pernah mengkhianati UMNO. Saya hanya menentang pemimpin UMNO yang korup dan menyeleweng.

Namun, jika mereka beranggapan perjuangan saya berkubur di sini, mereka silap. Saya akan terus berjuang selagi hayat dikandung badan. Biarlah mereka memecat saya dan melakukan apa sahaja untuk melunturkan semangat juang saya. Obor perjuangan di dalam jiwa saya akan terus menyala.

Walaupun tindakan terhadap saya daripada penggantungan jawatan sehingga pemecatan saya daripada parti bercanggah dengan proses keadilan dan tidak berperlembagaan, saya tidak akan merayu.

Saya redha dengan ketentuan Allah s.w.t. Saya telah melaksanakan tanggungjawab saya sebagai pemimpin UMNO dan akan tetap terus melaksanakan tanggungjawab saya kepada agama, bangsa dan negara seperti pejuang-pejuang bangsa kita sebelum ini. Bangkitlah bangsa Melayu memperjuangkan nilai-nilai moral dan integriti supaya kita tidak mudah diperkotak-katikkan oleh pemimpin yang rasuah dan tamak haloba. 

Kepada para penyokong, saya tahu anda memahami pendirian saya. Teruskanlah perjuangan menegakkan kebenaran dan membela tanah air tercinta walau di mana sahaja anda berada. InsyaAllah kita akan terus bersama dalam perjuangan suci ini. 

Kepada seluruh rakyat Malaysia, saya yakin anda boleh menilai yang mana benar dan yang mana salah, yang mana baik dan yang mana buruk. Anda pastinya tidak rela membiarkan negara ini diperlakukan sewenang-wenangnya oleh pemimpin yang rakus menyalahgunakan kuasa. Sebagai rakyat, anda berhak untuk membuat perhitungan yang terbaik demi masa depan anda, keluarga dan negara.

Saya menganggap pemecatan saya ini adalah satu lagi dugaan Allah s.w.t terhadap saya dalam bulan Ramadhan yang mulia ini. Saya yakin segala yang berlaku ada hikmahnya. Saya berdoa semoga sentiasa diberikan ketabahan dan kesabaran dalam menghadapi ujian Allah dan segala urusan kita akan dipermudahkan oleh-Nya.

Allah s.w.t berfirman dalam Surah At-Taghabun ayat 11 yang bermaksud:

"Tidak ada kesusahan (atau bala bencana) yang menimpa seseorang melainkan dengan izin Allah, dan sesiapa yang beriman kepada Allah, Allah akan memimpin hatinya (untuk menerima apa yang telah berlaku dengan tenang dan sabar) , dan ingatlah Allah maha mengetahui akan tiap- tiap sesuatu"

Sempena bulan Ramadhan yang mulia dan Syawal yang bakal menjelma, saya menyusun sepuluh jari memohon kemaafan daripada seluruh ahli UMNO sekiranya terdapat sebarang kesilapan yang saya lakukan sepanjang saya berada di dalam parti.

Selamat tinggal UMNO.

Kepada Allah saya berserah.

TAN SRI MUHYIDDIN YASSIN
25 Jun 2016

My take:

Friday 24 June 2016

Somebody's goose is about to be cooked?

Back to the 1MDB Corruption Scandal:


Police are probing the connection between Good Star Ltd and 1MDB-linked tycoon Low Taek Jho, better known as Jho Low.

"That is part of our investigations," inspector-general of police Khalid Abu Bakar told a press conference in Ampang today.

He said this when asked if police would follow up on The Wall Street Journal's (WSJ) report that Jho Low was the sole owner of Good Star.

Reuters had also confirmed Low's ownership with an official who reportedly had knowledge of a regulatory investigation.

Some US$1.03 billion from 1MDB was diverted into Good Star in 2009, when the state investment fund was doing business with PetroSaudi International.

I hope our PDRM will investigate and get this teflon like fat fellow back to Malaysia to answer some very serious questions like WHERE ARE OUR BILLIONS?

Read also from M'kini:

For the past year, the Malaysian government has said a company called Good Star Ltd, which received US$1.03 billion from the scandal-hit 1MDB investment fund, was owned by the fund's joint venture partner, PetroSaudi International Ltd.

Now, an official with knowledge of a regulatory investigation, has confirmed what Malaysia's central bank has recently asserted: Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho was the sole owner of Good Star during its five years as a company.

"What I can say for sure is that Jho Low is the exclusive beneficial owner of Good Star," the official said.

According to a registration document seen by Reuters, Good Star was incorporated in the Seychelles on May 18, 2009, four months before the initial payment to PetroSaudi. It was dissolved five years later, on May 2, 2014.

Low, who is most often referred to as Jho Low, was the owner of Good Star throughout those five years, the official said.

Both Jho Low, and the government have denied he had anything to do with 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), a fund Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak founded in September 2009 to invest in strategic property and energy projects.

Malaysian companies and banks linked to 1MDB are at the centre of corruption and money laundering probes that have led investigators to look at transactions and financial relationships across the globe - from Malaysia to Singapore and the Seychelles, from Abu Dhabi to offshore companies in the Caribbean, and from the United States to Switzerland.

Investigations are being conducted by authorities in the United States, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates.

Energy investment?

Unravelling the status of Good Star's ownership is important, investigators say, because it will help determine whether 1MDB's funds were misappropriated or used for legitimate investments, as the government maintains.

If Jho Low is the sole owner of Good Star, it could indicate that 1MDB funds were not directed to an energy project investment with PetroSaudi but for another purpose,
investigators say.

The 34-year-old Jho Low has not been charged with any offence in the investigations into 1MDB. He did not reply to requests for comment that were directed to his private equity and advisory firm in Hong Kong, Jynwel Capital, and his whereabouts could not be determined.

Najib, who was the chairperson of 1MDB's advisory board until recently, has denied any wrongdoing.

The Prime Minister's Office did not respond to requests for comment about Good Star for this article. 1MDB and the Finance Ministry, which is the sole shareholder of the fund, declined to comment.

PetroSaudi was founded in 2005 by Saudi businessman Tarek Essam Ahmad Obaid, a graduate of Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, the company's website says.

PetroSaudi and Obaid did not respond directly when asked if the firm owned Good Star.

The London-based law firm of Carter-Ruck, speaking on behalf of PetroSaudi, said in an emailed statement: "Our clients categorically deny any wrongdoing in relation to the Joint Venture with 1MDB, and they have made clear that all funds invested by 1MDB in the Joint Venture were returned, with profits."

Bank Negara letter

Good Star's ownership continues to be a matter of debate in Malaysia.

The head of Malaysia's parliamentary inquiry into 1MDB last month denied Jho Low was the owner of Good Star. He did so in explaining why he rejected a letter from Malaysia's central bank, Bank Negara, saying that Jho Low, indeed, was the owner.

The parliamentary Public Accounts Committee inquiry chief, Hasan Arifin, who is from Najib's ruling party Umno, said he did not include the confidential letter in his final report on 1MDB because the bank's source of information was "intelligence grade", which "may be prejudiced against various parties".

Hasan declined to comment to Reuters. Bank Negara too did not respond to requests for comment.

The former chief executive of 1MDB, Shahrol Halmi, told the inquiry that Good Star was a subsidiary of PetroSaudi, according to the PAC report.

1MDB made two payments to Good Star, in 2009 and 2011, totalling US$1.03 billion (RM4.156 billion at current rates). What happened to the money after that could not be determined because the inquiry panel was not given information on 1MDB's foreign banking transactions, according to PAC member Tony Pua, who is from the opposition.

The Wall Street Journal on July 3 of last year reported that global investigators believed that US$700 million (RM2.824 billion at current rates) in cash moved through banks and companies linked to 1MDB before eventually going into Najib's personal bank accounts.

None of the investigations across the world into 1MDB have shown any connection between any alleged misappropriation of money linked to 1MDB and the prime minister.

Malaysia's attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali cleared Najib in January of any corruption or criminal offences. Apandi said that US$681 million, deposited into Najib's personal account in March 2013 before a Malaysian general election, was a gift from a member of Saudi Arabia's royal family and most of it was returned.

Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir told reporters in April the funds wired into Najib's account from an unspecified Saudi source were "a genuine donation" with no obligations attached.


- Reuters

May the truth prevail and the crooks who stole our Billions get their just rewards.

Saturday 18 June 2016

Malaysia kalah kepada Papua New Guinea 2-0

When will soccer be a great Malaysian sport ever again?



I guess the answer is still blowing in the wind.

Wednesday 15 June 2016

IPIC will be taking 1MDB and Malaysia's MOF to Arbitration over USD 6.5 Billion (RM26 Billion) claim

More bad news coming to 1MDB and the Najib led Malaysian Government.

From M'kini:

IPIC takes 1MDB, MOF to international arbitration over US$6.5b claim


The International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) and its subsidiary Aabar Investments PJS (Aabar) have submitted a Request for Arbitration (RFA) to the London Court of International Arbitration over its US$6.5 billion claim against 1MDB and the Ministry of Finance Incorporated (MoF).

"The RFA concerns the failure by 1MDB and MoF to perform their contractual obligations under the binding term sheet (BTS) as described in IPIC GMTN Limited's announcement of June 10, 2015 (RNS Number 7064P)," read the disclosure sent by IPIC to the London Stock Exchange today.

The BTS referred to was the agreement signed between IPIC and 1MDB, whereby the Abu Dhabi-based firm will take over liabilities of the government investment arm for two of its bond issues in return for cash payments and asset transfers.

IPIC, however, has claimed that 1MDB and the MOF have failed to live up to their end of the bargain after the assets never materialised and monies meant for Aabar was somehow diverted to another company with nearly the same name but based in the British Virgin Islands instead of Dubai.

This has led to IPIC backing out of the white knight deal to assume 1MDB's debts, specifically to pay off several recently due interest payments which 1MDB had then defaulted on. As it is also guarantor of the bonds, IPIC paid the interests but is claiming the amount from both 1MDB and MoF.

1MDB, however, claims that allegations of missing funds notwithstanding, it has lived up to its end of the deal and transferred monies to firms it believed were IPIC-linked and expected the Abu-Dhabi firm to abide by its obligations under the BTS.

IPIC stated that the failure of 1MDB and MoF to perform their obligations, cure their defaults or put forward acceptable proposals has left IPIC in the position where it must pursue its claims in arbitration which it says amounts to US$6.5 billion.

"The claim will be determined by an arbitral tribunal that will comprise three arbitrators in accordance with the BTS and the LCIA Rules," said IPIC in the disclosure.

In an immediate response, 1MDB said that it took note of the RFA to the London Court of International Arbitration.

"1MDB and its legal counsel will review the request for arbitration once it has been served with a copy," the sovereign fund said in a statement.

1MDB also reiterates its stand that notwithstanding the dispute with IPIC, it has a strong liquidity position and is able to honour its current debt obligations.


If it really goes to arbitration and 1MDB and MOF lose....the Malaysian Government will have to pay, which meant that taxpayers money will be paying for that as well... no surprise on that score.

I think the bigger question and one that I think many of us will be asking is where did the money purportedly 'diverted to another company with nearly the same name but based in the British Virgin Islands instead of Dubai' really went and ended up on whose lap?

related post:

Will gov't raise tolls, taxes if it has to pay IPIC, PAS asks

Monday 6 June 2016

Goodbye Champ...Alfatihah

إِنَّا للهِ وَإِنَّـا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعونَ
"We surely belong to Allah and to Him we shall return."

The Champ is no more with us...Alfatihah


Pray that his soul is in a better place with God Almighty.

Wednesday 1 June 2016

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar - Is Hudud Central to Islam?


CHANDRA MUZAFFAR is Yayasan 1Malaysia chairperson. This essay was written in 1992. It first appeared under the title 'Hudud: Central to Islam?' in his book ‘Rights, Religion and Reform’.

Is hudud truly central to Islam?
The proponents of hudud laws have created the erroneous impression that hudud laws are central to Islam, that they define the character and identity of an Islamic state and society.

If we examined the growth and spread of Islam, how Islamic civilisation sustained its dynamic spirit for centuries, and what led to its eventual decline, we get a different picture of the role of hudud in the religion.

The spread of Islam from Spain to China within one hundred years of Prophet Muhammad's death, more rapid than the spread of any other religion in history, was not due to some inherent attraction to hudud laws.

Islam came as a liberator to all sorts of people suffering from oppression and persecution. This was how the religion was perceived by the Persians, for instance, just as it brought a measure of equality to the Egyptians who for centuries had been groaning under the yoke of unjust social structures maintained by the Greeks and Romans.

The promise of justice, equality and freedom, enhanced no doubt by the compassion and tolerance of Sufi saints, played a major role in the diffusion of Islam as a faith, an ideology and a way of life. Or, in the words of HG Wells:

"Islam prevailed because it was the best social and political order the times could offer. It prevailed because everywhere it found politically apathetic peoples, robbed, oppressed, bullied, uneducated and unorganized and it found selfish and unsound governments out of touch with any people at all.

“It was the broadest, freshest and cleanest political idea that had yet come into actual activity in the world and it offered better terms than any other to the masses of mankind."

It was primarily because of what it did for human dignity and social justice that Islam flourished as a great world civilisation between the eighth and fourteenth centuries.

There was, however, another reason, too.

Hudud did not save Muslim empires from downfall

At its zenith, Islam exercised overwhelming command over all types of knowledge. A vast corpus of knowledge applied to commerce and the economy, science and education, the military and administration gave Islamic civilisation the strength and resilience to withstand various trials and tribulations.

Hudud, understood today as modes of punishment associated with criminal law, cannot claim to have helped preserve the quintessence of Islamic civilisation.

Even the decline of Islamic civilisation has no direct or indirect link to the observance or non-observance of hudud laws.

As distinguished Muslim thinkers like Shah Waliullah have pointed out, elite corruption and oppression, apart from the devastation wrought by external invasions, were largely responsible for the downfall of Muslim empires in history.

It is worth noting that most of these empires and kingdoms faithfully carried out hudud ordinances. But this could not save them from decline and dissolution since they had ceased to be loyal to the fundamental spirit of justice embodied in the Quran.

In fact, there are a few examples of Muslim regimes today, which adhere strictly to hudud and yet their people remain trapped in poverty, ignorance and ill health.

One of these hudud-oriented societies in West Asia has an incredibly high rate of illiteracy, in spite of its huge oil revenue.

It is also totally autocratic, does not even observe minimal public accountability and denies the ordinary people any form of participation in government.

The ills of this and other Muslim societies cannot be overcome through the mere imposition of hudud laws.

It is only too obvious that the colossal challenges confronting most Muslim societies today, ranging from poverty and exploitation to authoritarianism and foreign domination, cannot be resolved through the promulgation of hudud ordinances.

However, a significant segment of the ulama continues to believe that allegiance to these laws demonstrates fidelity to the faith.

This is why they are even prepared to label as "murtad" (apostates) those who question the relevance of hudud the eternal Islamic mission of protecting human dignity and promoting social justice.

Muslim reformers and the hudud philosophy

Before we try to understand this attitude of some contemporary ulama, it is important to emphasise that by questioning the relevance of the modes of punishment prescribed in hudud, one is not challenging the notion of right and wrong that underpins Islamic law or the syariah.

For a Muslim, murder or theft or adultery or consuming liquor would always remain morally reprehensible.

Preserving and protecting the basic moral structure of the Quran embodied in its eternal values and principles is essential to the defence of Islam's fundamental ethical foundation and framework.

Muslim reformers who regard various types of punishment in hudud ordinances as contextual have never been known to raise doubts about the validity and the authenticity of Quranic values and principles.

Indeed, some of them would even argue that the obsession with meting out punishment in hudud legislation in various Muslim countries today is inimical to the spirit of encouraging the wrongdoer to repent and reform which is germane to the Quran and the example of the prophet (the sunnah).

After all, hudud itself is essentially a reminder to the human being of the importance of observing certain boundaries, certain restraints, in one's personal and social conduct. It is a way of persuading the human being to function within a moral realm.

Hudud, in its philosophical sense, is not a rigid, dogmatic set of rules and regulations.

Unfortunately, an important section of contemporary ulama do not see hudud or Islamic law from this perspective.

The vast majority, whatever their sect or inclination, adopt a legalistic, traditionalist approach
to Islam.

Laws - not universal values or eternal principles - in their opinion embody the sanctity of the religion. It explains why laws - though only about 300 out of 6,666 verses in the Quran deal with various types of laws - are given so much prominence in the writings of the ulama.

By overemphasising laws, the ulama, who alone exercise authority over interpretation, enhance their own power. It is a power derived to a great extent from their role as the custodians of the whole tradition of Islamic law.

And, in applying the syariah to the contemporary situation, the ulama invariably adopt an unthinking, uncritical approach.

Consequently, the syariah in its entirety, and not just its Quranic root, is seen as divine and sacred.

Indeed, there are rules and regulations in the syariah, including some pertaining to the hudud, which are not consonance with either the letter or the spirit of the Quran.

For instance, the Quran does not prescribe any specific punishment for sukr (intoxication) but hudud laws do.

Similarly, the Quran does not lay out any punishment for apostasy, though it condemns it in the strongest terms. In hudud, it is punishable by death.

Why legalist Islam has a greater grip on Muslims than the Quran

It is significant that most Muslims today accept these hudud punishments as divinely ordained. It goes to show that in reality, legalist, traditionalist Islam has a more powerful grip upon the Muslim mind than the Quran itself.

This is not an accident. It is a product of both history and contemporary developments.

As the compassion and egalitarianism of early Islam slowly declined, Muslim rulers sought to legitimise their power through the manipulation of Islamic forms, symbols and laws.

Very often, the ulama who served these rulers helped to buttress the latter's authority by formulating harsher modes of punishment for certain crimes or by providing more rigid interpretations to existing laws which often went beyond what the Quran, the primary source of legislation in Islam, and the sunnah, its ancillary source, had intended in the first place.

Consequently, a certain rigidity began to develop vis-à-vis the syariah and public administration.

The situation was exacerbated by a catastrophic event which has had a profound impact upon the entire development of Islamic civilisation after the thirteenth century.

This was the wanton destruction of Baghdad in 1258 by the Tartars led by Hulagu Khan. Baghdad was not only the greatest centre of learning in the Muslim world. In its time, it was undoubtedly a beacon of knowledge for the whole world.

According to the Sri Lankan jurist and scholar, CG Weeramantry, "the great House of Learning (library) in Baghdad accommodated 800,000 volumes."

But once the devastation took place, the spirit of learning and inquiry, of research and scholarship, began to wane. For it was not just Baghdad which was destroyed ; the Tartar in an earlier wave of attacks had annihilated other illustrious centres of art, culture and learning like Bukhara, Khwarizm, Samarkand, Balkh, Merv and Nishapur.

As a result of these invasions which "shook the world of Islam to its very foundations," a conservative mood took root within Muslim communities in that part of the world.

Because they had lost so much of their intellectual and cultural heritage, they were determined to preserve and protect what was left. They became afraid of reform and change. They were reluctant to question the wisdom of certain laws in the Shariah formulated by their ulama.

Another major setback occurred a few centuries later. The colonization of almost the entire Muslim world by Western powers starting from the sixteenth century onwards, further strengthened the conservative trend within the religion.

Having lost control over their lands and their destinies, Muslims became very cautious towards ideas and practices from alien sources which might erode their collective identity as a religious community.

This fear of losing their identity has become even more pronounced in the post-colonial period. It is a fear which is not without justification, for Western domination and control of Muslim societies continues unabated.

Indeed, Western cultural and psychological penetration of Muslim and other non-Western societies today is so much deeper than what it was at the height of colonialism.

A huge portion of the Muslim populace has chosen to respond to the challenge by re-asserting what it perceives as its Muslim identity via attire, food, laws and so on.

Adhering strictly to hudud and syariah as they had evolved in the early centuries of Islam is part of this re-assertion.

‘Rigid interpretations lead to decay’

While it is important to re-assert one's identity as a way of protecting Muslim autonomy and independence, it does not follow that this should lead to an unthinking, uncritical acceptance of each and every aspect of hudud and syariah. Such an attitude will be disastrous for the Muslim community.

For there are elements in the syariah connected with basic human rights, the roles and rights of women, the rights of non-Muslim minorities and international relations which have to be re-appraised in order to bring them into some harmony with the eternal, universal Quranic commitment to human dignity and social justice.

Hudud laws and other aspects of criminal justice should also be seen in that light. This is a position which has been taken by some of the most outstanding thinkers in Islam.

Shah Waliullah, for instance, argued that "every age must seek its own interpretation of the Quran and the traditions." He believed that "one of the major causes of Muslim decay was rigid conformity to interpretations made in other ages."

Muhammad Iqbal was also of the view that "each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessors, should be permitted to solve its own problems in accordance with the level of its consciousness and the demands of the time."

For Iqbal such an approach to the Shariah was important since the Quran itself teaches that life is a process of progressive creation.

Like Waliullah and Iqbal, Ali Shariati was also very critical of "traditional, formalistic Islam." He wanted to liberate the religion from the grip of those Ulama "who had imprisoned Islam by monopolizing it."

Another twentieth century thinker, Mohammad Arkoun, had often lamented in his writings that "the general Islamic consciousness remains content with dogma."

It is because of this consciousness that the ulama and their followers insist upon the implementation of hudud laws as they are.

But, as another recent thinker, noted for his brilliant scholarship, the late Fazlur Rahman, points out: "To insist on literal interpretation of the rules of the Quran, shutting one's eyes to the social change that has occurred and that is so palpably occurring before our eyes, is tantamount to deliberately defeating its moral-social purpose and objectives.

“It is just as though, in view of the Quranic emphasis on freeing slaves, one were to insist on preserving the institution of slavery so that one could earn merit in the sight of God by freeing slaves. Surely the whole tenor of the teaching of the Quran is that there should be no slavery at all."

It is this sort of fundamental re-thinking that is urgently needed in the Muslim world today.

CHANDRA MUZAFFAR is Yayasan 1Malaysia chairperson. This essay was written in 1992. It first appeared under the title 'Hudud: Central to Islam?' in his book ‘Rights, Religion and Reform’.

Less form more substance would be good for Muslims here in Malaysia.

...and for a better perspective please read the then PM Dr Mahathir's letter to the then MB of Kelantan TG Nik Aziz which I think is relevant now as it was relevant then:


PERDANA MENTERI MALAYSIA

YAB Tuan Haji Nik Abdul Aziz bin Nik Mat
Menteri Besar Kelantan
 
Y.A.B. Tuan Haji,
 
PENGUATKUASAAN KANUN JENAYAH SYARIAH II 1993 DI NEGERI KELANTAN
 
Rujukan : MB(KN)(S)16/6/(26) Bertarikh 8 Jun 1994
 
Pihak kerajaan pusat sentiasa berpandukan kepada kebijaksanaan (al-Hikmah) yang telah ditunjukkan oleh baginda Rasulullah SAW. dan juga para sahabat baginda khususnya al-khulafa ar-Rasyidun dalam melaksanakan ajaran Islam lebih-lebih lagi yang berkaitan dengan hukum-hukum jenayah.
 
 
1. Jalan yang diambil oleh Kerajaan Pusat ini adalah juga berpandukan kepada kaedah yang terdapat dalam sistem pemerintahan Islam iaitu "tindakan pemerintahan adalah sentiasa bergantung kapada kepentingan ramai (muslihat umum)." Penguatkuasaan kanun jenayah yang digubal oleh Kerajaan PAS di Kelantan, menurut kajian sehingga setakat ini tidak menampakkan dan tidak menyakinkan pakar-pakar perundangan Islam yang tidak mempunyai sebarang kepentingan politik bahawa ia selari dengan ajaran dan kehendak Islam sebagaimana yang telah diuruskan dengan bijaksana oleh Rasulullah SAW. dan para sahabat.
 
2. Sepertimana yang Amat Berhormat sendiri sedia ketahui, KEADILAN adalah ASAS yang paling utama ditekankan oleh agama Islam apabila melaksanakan sesuatu perkara. Penekanan mengenai dengan keadilan adalah sangat terserlah dalam ajaran Islam lebih daripada penekanan yang terdapat dalam ajaran-ajaran yang lain dalam sejarah agama. Baginda Rasulullah SAW sewaktu mengembangkan agama Islam ialah usaha menghapuskan ketidakadilan yang menjadi sebahagian daripada budaya di zaman itu.
 
3. Tidak perlu bagi saya menyatakan disini betapa banyaknya terdapat ayat-ayat Al-Quran yang menegaskan tentang pentingnya keadilan dan lebih banyak bagi ayat-ayat yang mencela sebarang jenis kezaliman. Disamping itu al-Quran juga sentiasa menggesa supaya dielak daripada terjadinya huru-hara dan Allah sendiri sangat tidak gemarkan kapada mereka yang menyebabkan huru-hara berlaku. Kita hanya bertindak balas terhadap sikap permusuhan dan serangan yang dilakukan terhadap kita. Di Malaysia, orang bukan Islam bukan sahaja tidak memusuhi kita tetapi mereka memberi kerjasama bahkan membantu kita dalam urusan-urusan yang bersangkutan dengan kegiatan dan amalan ajaran Islam.
 
4. Khusus mengenai undang-undang jenayah PAS di Kelantan, kajian awal menunjukkan dengan jelas bahawa undang-undang itu yang disediakan menerusi perjuangan sebuah parti politik ternyata bukan sahaja menyebabkan ketidakadilan aakan berlaku tetapi, sebaliknya ia akan membawa kezaliman. Kebenaran kenyataan ini adalah berdasarkan kapada keterangan berikut:
 
(i) Dakwaan bahawa undang-undang ini akan dikuatkuasakan hanya di kalangan orang Islam sahaja dan tidak digunapakai untuk orang bukan Islam akan menyebabkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman yang ketara berlaku. Memang benar di zaman Nabi Muhammad SAW., orang Yahudi biasa dihukum di bawah undang-undang yang berada di dalam kitab Taurat mereka tetapi kitab Taurat mempunyai hukuman yang tidak berbedza dengan hukum-hukum dalam al Quran. Mereka yang berzina umpamanya, akan dihukum rejam sama seperti hukuman terhadap jenayah yang sama bagi orang Islam. Justru itu tidak ada perbedzaan sama ada penjenayah dihukum di bawah undang-undang Islam atau Undang-undang Yahudi di zaman Nabi Muhammad SAW. Tetapi terdapat perbedzaan yang amat ketara di antara hukuman di bawah undang-undang yang ada sekarang dengan hukuman di bawah undang-undang jenayah yang dicadangkan oleh kerajaan PAS di Kelantan.
 
Menghukum orang Islam dengan lebih berat tetapi orang bukan Islam dengan amat ringan untuk jenayah yang sama atau jenayah dilakukan bersama amatlah tidak adil dan merupakan satu kezaliman, sedangkan undang-undang PAS akan menyebabkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman berlaku, maka undang-undang PAS tidak boleh diterima sebagai undang-undang Islam atau secucuk dengan undang-undang Islam ataupun selaras dengan ajaran Islam. Ia sebenarnya tertentangan dengan agama Islam.
 
(ii) Masaalah kesalahan merogol wanita, berdasarkan kapada undang-undang PAS, jika seseorang wanita yang belum kahwin melahirkan anak maka ini adalah bukti ia telah berzina dan akan dihukum mengikut undang-undang PAS, sedangkan apa yang sebenarnya berlaku ialah wanita itu adalah mangsa rogol. Mengikut undang-undang PAS jika ia menuduh perogolnya, tuduhan hanya boleh diterima sah jika terdapat empat orang saksi (yang terdiri daripada orang-orang yang baik, yang tidak melakukan dosa besar) yang menyatakan bahawa telah melihat dengan terang dan jelas bahawa yang dituduh telah merogol wanita berkenaan.
 
Seperti kita ketahui, melainkan dalam keadaan perang seperti di Bosnia diwaktu mana orang Serb merogol beramai-ramai wanita Bosnia, tidak mungkin jenayah merogol dilakukan di hadapan saksi-saksi yang terdiri daripada orang-orang yang baik. Jika saksi ini melihat dan mereka tidak menolong wanita berkenaan, mereka boleh dianggap sebagai bersubahat seperti penjenayah-penjenayah Serb bersubahat dengan perogol daripada kaum mereka. Jika ada pun saksi, dan mereka tidak membuat apa-apa untuk menolong mereka tidak boleh dianggap sebagai terdiri daripada orang yang baik, tetapi disebaliknya dianggap sudah bersubahat. Dengan itu tuduhan mangsa rogol akan ditolak dan perogol akan terlepas.
 
Keadaan di mana mangsa rogol dihukum salah kerana melahirkan anak di luar nikah dan perogol dilepaskan sebagai tidak bersalah kerana tidak ada saksi adalah sama sekali tidak boleh diterima oleh sesiapa pun sebagai sesuatu yang adil, bahkan aia adalah satu kezaliman yang dahsyat.
 
5. Hukum Hudud Islam bertujuan untuk memberi keadilan kapada semua pihak. Ia bukanlah bertujuan untuk melakukan kezaliman. Undang-undang PAS jelas menunjukkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman yang ketara akan berlaku. Justeru itu undang-undang yang disediakan oleh PAS bukanlah undang-undang yang menepati ajaran Islam. Ia hanyalah undang-undang ciptaan PAS yang bertentangan dengan penekanan oleh agama Islam yang menuntut supaya menghukum secara adil dan menolok sebarang kezaliman. Kerajaan Pusat akan sentiasa berpandu dan menerima ajaran-ajaran dan amalan Islam dari semua aspek tanpa diheret oleh kehendak organasasi politik yang mempunyai kepentingan yang lain daripada Islam dan kepentingannya .
 
6. Jika undang-undang PAS yang jelas mengandungi unsur-unsur ketidakadilan dikuatkuasakan dinegara ini, dan jika ia dikatakan itulah Hukum Hudud Islam maka umat Islam dan juga anggota masyarakat bukan Islam akan hilang kepercayaan Islam membawa keadilan untuk penganutnya. Ia juga memberi gambaran yang buruk terhadap agama yang suci ini dan menjejaskan imej orang-orang Islam di kalangan penganut agama-agama yang lain. Ia tetap akan menyebabkan penganut agama lain menjauhkan diri daripada agama Islam dan menyebabkan orang yang berminat memeluk Islam menolaknya.
 
7. Kerajaan Pusat tidak berhajat untuk bersubahat dengan PAS bagi melaksanakan ketidakadilan semata-mata untuk kepentingan politik dan sokongan oleh orang yang telah diabui matanya. Kerajaan Malaysia yang sentiasa dan terus mempertahankan ajaran dan nilai-nilai Islam tidak dapat membenarkan Kerajaan Pas menjalankan sesuatu yang bercangah dengan prinsip keadilan dalam Islam, maka Kerajaan Pusat akan mengambil tindakan yang sewajarnya terhadap Kerajaan PAS demi menjaga maruah dan ketinggian martabat Islam dan penganut-penganutnya.
 
DR. MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
15 Julai 1994